Emotional Intelligence - Sales Performance Relatio

32 Zazli Lily Wisker, Athanasios Poulis
DOI: 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
International Journal of Management and Economics (Zeszyty Naukowe KGŚ)

No. 43, July–September 2014, pp. 32–52; http://www.sgh.waw.pl/ijme/
Zazli Lily Wisker

Faculty of Business, American University of the Middle East
Athanasios Poulis
Faculty of Business, American University of the Middle East
Emotional Intelligence – Sales Performance

Relationship: A Mediating Role of Adaptive Selling
Behaviour
Abstract
In this study, we examined the impact of emotional intelligence on sales performance.
We posited that the impact of emotional intelligence (EI) on sales performance was medi‑
ated by adaptive selling behaviour (ASB). Data were collected from 281 sales people in the
financial industries in Malaysia via the WLEIS emotional intelligence scale and ADAPTS
adaptive selling behaviour scale, and were quantitatively analysed using structural equation
modelling (SEM). Results were in keeping with the model. Three domains of EI were not
found to impact sales performance directly but through ASB. Theoretical implications
and managerial ramifications were also discussed.
Keywords: Emotional intelligence (EI), adaptive selling behaviour (ASB), sales perform‑

ance.
JEL: M310, M100
Introduction
Today’s marketing environment is complex; the market is extremely competitive,
technology is making alternatives and low‑distribution methods possible, product life‑
cycles are accelerating, and customers are becoming less loyal and more sophisticated
© 2014 Zazli Lily Wisker, Athanasios Poulis.

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs license
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Downloaded from PubFactory at 09/06/2016 01:48:35PM
via free access
Emotional Intelligence – Sales Performance Relationship: A Mediating Role of Adaptive... 33
while at the same time becoming more demanding. As a result, the nature of buyer‑seller
exchanges and account management has shifted from a simplistic production‑and‑sales
perspective to a more complex role of partnering with customers [Dwyer, Schurr, Oh,
1987; Weitz, Bradford, 1999]. Competing in this environment requires firms to possess
the best possible group of salespeople. Good salespeople continue to have a value in firms
in generating sales and building strong, loyal customer relationships. In fact, salespeople
play a key role not only in customer relationship management but also in understanding,
creating, communicating and delivering values to customers, which in turn increases
the sales performance of the firm [Paparoidomis, Guenzi, 2009; Weitz, Bradford, 1999].
Therefore, it is not surprising that for decades sales management researchers have invested
time in studying determinants of salesperson performance. Researchers have come to agree
that role perception, aptitude, skill level and motivation level are the main determinants
of salesperson performance [Churchill et al., 1985]. Although in recent years there has
been considerable and growing interest in the concept of emotional intelligence [EI] in
the Organizational Behaviour, Human Resources, and Management literature [O’Boyle Jr.
et al., 2010], it has yet to receive sufficient attention in the sales performance literature.
The research areas in the Organizational Behaviour, Human Resources and Manage‑
ment literature stress the importance of EI as a predictor of leadership, negotiation skills,
perception of trust in leader‑member relationship, organizational citizen behaviours,
work‑family conduct, and work performance [Ashkanasy, Daus, 2002; Carmeli, Josman,
2006; Cote, Miner, 2006; Dulewicz et al., 2005; Humprey et al., 2008].
The theory of emotional intelligence was set forth by the Harvard psychologist; Gardner
in 1983. He based his theory upon the social intelligence concept developed by Thorndike
in 1920. Gardner’s concept was then expanded by Mayer and Salovey in the early 1990s;
however, it did not come become popular until Goleman published his book in 1995. The
concept of emotional intelligence has been developed in the fields of neuro‑psychology
and neuro‑science, and focuses on a patterned structure of responses that regulates emo‑
tions: in particular, it focuses on the role of brain connectivity between the amygdale and
the neural cortex [Roche, 2004]. Despite its recent emergence in the literature, it already
includes a large number of domains. Of these many domains, four main approaches to
emotional intelligence have been widely used in recent years – the EQ‑i Bar On; the ECi
Goleman approach; the Four Branch Model of Mayer, Salovey and Caruso [MSCEIT];
and the Four Dimension EI approach of Davies, Stankov and Roberts [1998] [Law et al.,
2004; Rahim, Psenicka, Zhao, Yu, Chan, Kwok Wai et al., 2002]. Although a variety of EI
domains have been conceptualised over the years, the modern interest in EI began with
Mayer and Salovey [1997]. They [1990] describe emotional intelligence as a form of social
intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings and emo‑
tions, to discriminate among them, and to use them to guide one’s thinking and action.
Their concept of emotional intelligence has been built upon by Mayer et al. [1997; 2000],
who suggest the four‑branch model as the construct of emotional intelligence: (1) the
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
ability to accurately perceive, appraise and express emotion; (2) the ability to use emo‑
tion to facilitate thinking; (3) the ability to understand the temporal course and probable
outcome of emotions; and (4) the ability to regulate emotions effectively. They also claim
that emotional intelligence is a form of intelligence in that the development of emotional
intelligence increases with age [Mayer, Salovey, 1997]. It is important to recognise, however,
that the various theoretical perspectives regarding emotional intelligence are not mutually
exclusive. In a meta‑analytic study, Van Roy and Viswesvaran [2004, p. 72] described EI
as “the set of abilities [verbal and non‑verbal] that enable persons to generate, recognize,
express, understand, and evaluate their own, and others’, emotion in order to guide think‑
ing and action that successfully cope with environmental demands and pressures.” In this
study, we adopt the Law, Wong and Song EI measures, WLEIS [2004], which are based
on Mayer and Salovey [1997] and Mayer et al. [2000] This EI theoretical model examines
the four domains of EI separately.
Given that EI was initially made known through a series of articles [Gibbs, 1995] and
trade books [Goleman, 1995; 1998] with little or no analytic evidence established, it is
not surprising that EI has received robust criticism by few scholars and has received less
attention among sales management researchers. For example, EI is often considered as
an elusive and vague concept and as more of a myth than a science [Matthew et al., 2004].
These initial negative opinions on EI, according to Mayer et al. [2004], resulted from
the lack of empirical research evidence. Although there is much argument surrounding
the nature and validity of EI, it is also clear that the concept and domain of EI has been
gradually accepted in numerous studies [Davies et al., 1998; Mayer et al., 1997; 2004; Law
et al., 2004; Chrusciel, 2006]. For example, several empirical studies have found a positive
association between EI and performance [e.g., Dulewicz et al., 2005; Jennings, Palmer,
2007; O’Boyle Jr. et al., 2011; Semadar et al., 2006]. O’Boyle Jr. et al. [2011], in their meta
‑analysis, found a relationship between EI and job performance over and above cognitive
intelligence and the personality traits in all three streams studied. They concluded that “EI
represents one important predictor of job performance’ [O’Boyle Jr. et al., 2011, p. 806].
Similarly, Van Roy and Viswevaran [2004] provide empirical support for the positive impact
of EI on performance. In contrast, others found an inconsistent or non‑existent relation
between EI and performance on particular tasks [Austin, 2004], academic performance
[Petrides et al., 2004], and supervisory ratings [Wong, Law, 2002]. Interestingly, Tae and
Won‑Moo [2011] found that three domains of EI – appraisal of emotions, optimism, and
social skills – were negatively related to job performance.
Although the previous empirical studies have been helpful in contributing to the
body of knowledge, our present study builds upon the literature in a few ways. First,
there are few empirical studies in sales literature focusing on the impact of EI on sales
performance. Since EI is a form of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor
one’s own and others’ feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them, and to use
them to guide one’s thinking and action [Mayer, Salovey, 1997], it would be fair to argue
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
these are some of the skills required for building relationships between salespeople and
clients, which in turn could influence sales performance. Second, few empirical stud‑
ies have examined the components of EI domains that impact performance separately.
As Carmeli and Josman’s empirical study points out, “it is not clear which emotional
intelligence components implicate which type of work performance . . . it is important to
establish which specific components of the emotional intelligence model relate to work
outcomes” [Carmeli, Josman, 2006, p. 415]. We respond to Carmeli and Josman [2006]
by examining the impact of various EI domains on sales performance separately. Third,
Cote and Miners [2006] conclude that the relationship of EI to performance is not always
linear. In response, we argue that the effect of EI on sales performance can be extended
through a mediator.
In particular, this study addresses the following two broad research questions:
•• To what extent does EI influence the sales performance of a salesperson?
•• Does adapted selling behaviour mediate the relationship between EI and sales per‑
formance?
Emotional Intelligence and Work Performance

Despite the debate surrounding the concept and constructs of EI, several studies have
shown positive associations between EI and leadership, and to some extent individual
work performance and team performance [Dulewicz et al., 2005; Longhorn, 2004; Mayer,
Caruso, 2002]. A growing body of research suggests that EI provides basic competencies
that are important in almost any job. In fact, EI is claimed to be a better predictor of success
than the traditional measure of general intelligence, IQ [Goleman, 1998; Pellitteri, 2002].
For example, Goleman [1998] found that 67 % of the abilities that are regarded as essen‑
tial for effective performance were emotional competencies, and EI accounts for almost
twice as much as IQ and expertise. The higher an individual rises in an organisation, the
more important EI becomes, compared to IQ and technical skills [Goleman et al., 2002].
Dulewicz et al. [2005] provide some initial evidence that EI (9.2 %) makes the greatest
contribution to overall performance when compared to general intelligence (5.0 %) and
managerial competencies (6.1%). Emotional intelligence can enhance the job performance
of individuals even with low cognitive skills through the quality of social relationships
[Cote, Miners, 2006]. If job performance is not attained through cognitive intelligence,
it can be attained through EI via multiple complementary mechanisms, such as interac‑
tions with co‑workers, supervisors and support staff [Cote, Miners, 2006].
In the leadership literature, researchers found that leaders who are emotionally compe‑
tent were better performers and more successful [Brown, Moshavi, 2005; Mayer, Caruso,
2002]. An emotionally competent leader correlates with an emotionally competent group
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
norm, which in turn affects the team performance. Dulewicz et al. [2005], in studying the
leadership of navy officers across seven different ranks, found that EI accounts for the great‑
est contribution to overall performance. Another study that took place in a retail industry
found that EI was negatively related with workplace distress and stress, and positively
related with emotional well‑being, morale, quality of work life, and overall performance
ratings [Slaski, Cartwright, 2003]. Interestingly, although Wong and Law [2002] found
that the EI of leaders was positively related to job satisfaction and extra‑role behaviours
of followers, no relationship was found between the EI of leaders and the job performance
of their followers. Similarly, Feyerherm and Rice [2002] discovered that the higher the EI
of the team leader, the worse the team’s performance, concluding that highly emotional
intelligent people tend to focus on their own performance and hence neglect the team.
Langhorn [2004] found no support for the view that age‑related EI was associated with
performance. A person with high EI may employ their abilities to develop good social
relationships that can boost task performance through advice and social support [Wong
& Law, 2002]. For instance, the ability to be empathetic and understand both one’s own
emotions and the emotions of others would enable one to establish a rapport with and
effectively manage subordinates [Semadar et al., 2006]. Further, the ability to manage
and control emotional states such as anger and frustration can be conducive to a more
stable working environment [Newsome et al., 2000]. In addition, Cote and Miners [2006]
found that EI is an important predictor of job performance due to its interactive effect
with cognitive intelligence. Previous research has also explicitly proposed that EI relates
to task performance in independent and complementary linear ways [Mayer et al., 2000;
Cote et al., 2003]. Bardzil and Slaski [2003] suggest that if a manager has interpersonal
skills [one of the emotional intelligence constructs], then s/he can evaluate the emotional
states of customers in order to identify their needs [Chrusciel, 2006]. This could lead to
gaining competitive advantage. This suggestion is supported by Longhorn’s [2004] empiri‑
cal study on the restaurant industry. The study that uses Bar‑On EQ‑i [1997] measures
found that EI is positively related to customer satisfaction, which in turn increases the
performance of the firm [Longhorn, 2004]. Interestingly, the study also found that EI is
able to predict team turnover.
In the sales literature, it is recognized that the sales account management job requires
a sales account manager to deal with emotional skills and maintain self‑control when
under pressure in almost all sales tasks [Churchill et al., 1988]. Researchers have found
that a salesperson’s performance is related to his/her ability to manage various social
problems and deal with motivational and emotional problems that arise due to negative
feedback and failures [Brown et al., 1997]. A salesperson is also required to understand
the feelings of others and the reasons behind them in order to persuade them into entering
the sales‑purchase contract. A salesperson of high emotional intelligence will be resilient
and able to maintain self‑control and deal with difficult situation [Sjoberb, Littorin, 2003].
Summarising the discussion above, we hypothesise the following:
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
H1a: EI -1: Self‑emotion appraisal is positively related to sales performance.

H1b: EI-2: Others‑emotion appraisal is positively related to sales performance.
H1c: EI-3: Use of emotion is positively related to sales performance.
H1d: EI-4: Regulation of emotion is positively related to sales performance.
Adaptive Selling Behaviour (ASB)

The concept of adaptive selling behaviour has been examined and developed over
the last few decades [Park, Holloway, 2003; Spiro, Weitz, 1990; Weitz et al., 1986]. Gener‑
ally, adaptive selling behaviour refers to alterations in the selling strategies, tactics, social
style, verbal communication and physical appearance of the seller [Giacobbe et al., 2006].
Nonetheless, over the years, the definition of adaptive selling behaviour has evolved to
reflect the philosophy of selling and marketing in that era. In the late 70s to early 80s,
when ‘hard sell tactics’ were popular, adaptive selling behaviour was defined as “required
persuasive techniques and the selection and use of appropriate methods” [Weitz, 1981,
p. 502]. In comparison, in the late 80s, adaptive selling behaviour was defined as “the
altering of sales behaviour during a customer interaction or across customer interactions
based on perceived information about the nature of the selling situation” [Weitz et al.,
1986, p. 175]. In today’s relationship marketing era, buyers are more experienced, educated
and powerful; consequently, the definition of adaptive selling behaviour has changed to
reflect this condition: “a complex process that emphasizes customised solutions to fit each
buyer” [DelVecchio, Zemanek, McIntyre, Claxton, 2004, p. 859].
Emotional Intelligence and Adaptive Selling Behaviour

Since EI is a form of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one’s own
and others’ feelings and emotions, a salesperson high in EI is expected to be able to adapt
his/her selling behaviour to customise solutions to each potential buyer’s needs. As a sales‑
person engages in active listening and becomes sensitive to the feelings and emotions of
others, that salesperson develops a greater ability to understand the unique set of needs
and problems of the customer, which could lead to adaptive selling behaviour [Pelham,
2008]. As Giacobbe et al. [2006] developed a model of the relationship between adap‑
tive selling behaviour and sales performance, they argue that empathic ability towards
customers and the ability to pick up contextual cues and modify one’s own behaviour are
some of the domains that moderate the relationship between ASB and sales performance.
Arguably, these are the domains of emotional intelligence [Mayer, Salovey, 1997; Wong,
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
Law, 2002]. Based on this argument, it is fair to predict that ASB mediates the relationship
between EI and sales performance. Hence, we posit the following:
H2a: EI -1: The effect of self‑emotion appraisal on sales performance is mediated by
adaptive selling behaviour.
H2b: EI-2: The effect of others‑emotion appraisal on sales performance is mediated by
H2c: EI-3: The effect of use of emotion appraisal on sales performance is mediated by
H2d: EI-4: The effect of use of regulation of emotion on sales performance is mediated
by adaptive selling behaviour.
Adaptive Selling Behaviour and Sales Performance

The relationship between ASB and sales performance outcomes is well acknowledged
in the sales literature [Anglin et al., 1990; Giacobbe et al., 2006; Sujan et al., 1994]. For
example, several studies have found that adaptive selling behaviour exerts a positive influ‑
ence on a salesperson’s regular performance, closing ratios, and the effectiveness of a sales
department and unit [Johlke, 2006]. However, the practice of adaptive selling arguably
would be successful provided that the salespeople are predisposed to its facets, such as the
recognition of different selling approaches and the ability to use them, and the collection
of information about the sales situations to facilitate this adaptation [Spiro, Weitz, 1990].
Information about the market plays important roles in the success of adaptive selling
practices, which in turn influences the sales performance [Spiro, Weitz, 1990]. Based
on this finding and argument, it is fair to predict that ASB impacts sales performance.
Therefore, we posit the following:
H3: Adaptive selling behaviour is positively related to sales performance.
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
Figure 1. Research Model

S o u r c e : own elaboration.
METHODOLOGY
Data Collection
Data were collected from account managers in the financial industry in Malaysia. The
survey was distributed to 1441 account managers in December 2011, drawn randomly
from the 29 finance companies including stock broking houses in Malaysia that were reg‑
istered with Central Bank (Bank Negara). Subsequently 281 usable replies were received,
yielding a 19.5 % response rate. Twenty randomly selected non‑responding managers were
contacted by telephone to directly ascertain reasons for non‑response. This revealed that
the main reasons were (1) ineligibility, such as no longer having direct contact or making
sales presentations to customers, or (2) time constraints which prevented participation
in the survey.
Measures
To measure EI, we used the self‑rating emotional intelligence scale WLEIS [Law,
Wong, Song, 2004]. WLEIS was developed based on the EI theoretical concepts of Mayer
and Salovey [1997]. This measure has been validated and replicated by many scholars.
To conclude the validity of WLEIS, O’Boyle Jr. et al. stressed that “specifically, more
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
research needs to be conducted to assess the validity‑based measures of EI (e.g., MSCEIT

V2.0) as compared to self‑report measures WLEIS...” [2011, p. 789]. The response format
of this measure is a 5‑point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neither
Agree Nor Disagree, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree). The 16 items of the WLEIS measure
four EI‑related sub‑constructs: self‑emotions appraisal, others‑emotions appraisal, use of
emotion, and regulation of emotion – each of which has four items. Sample items include
the following: “I have a good sense of why I have certain feelings most of the time” (Self
‑Emotion Appraisal); “I always know my friends’ emotions from their behaviour” (Others
‑Emotions Appraisal); “I am a self‑motivating person” (Use of Emotion); and “I am quite
capable of controlling my own emotions” (Regulation of Emotion). Table 1 presents the
scale reliabilities for the EI constructs.
Table 1. Scale Reliability Coefficients (Alphas)
Emotional Intelligence
Cronbach Alpha
Variables α
Sample No. of items
EI 1 – Self‑Emotions .89 4
EI 2 – Others Emotion .91 4
EI 3 – Use of Emotion .89 4
EI 4 – Regulation of Emotion .87 4
We also used Exploratory Factor Analysis testing to examine whether the four EI
dimensions would emerge as separate factors. Because we are more interested in under‑
standing the correlations among constructs and have expected these constructs to be
somewhat correlated to each other, the Principal Factor Analysis method with Varimax
rotation was selected as the rotation method [Leech et al., 2014]. We ran a single factor
analysis on all sixteen [16] EI indicators and managed to extract 4 factors. The sample
accounts for 69.64 % of the variance in total, indicating strong support for the separation
of EI items into four distinct variables: EI self‑emotions, EI others‑emotions, EI use of
emotion, and EI regulation of emotion. Table 2 details out the results.
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
Table 2. Exploratory Factor of Emotional Intelligence

Factor Factor Factor Factor
Items Communalities
1 2 3 4
I always tell myself I am a competent person. .78 .78
I am a self‑motivated person. .73 .76
I always set goals for myself and try my best to achieve
.69 .78
them.
I would always encourage myself to try my best. .69 .55
I can always calm down quickly when I am angry. .80 .71
I am able to control my temper so that I can handle
.78 .83
difficulties rationally.
I am quite capable at controlling my own emotions. .75 .63
I have a good control of my own emotions. .61 .73
I am a good observer of others’ emotions. 88 .76
I always know my friends’ emotions from their
.81 .73
behaviour.
I have a good understanding of the emotions of people
.69 .68
around me.
I am sensitive to the feelings and emotions of people
.69 .59
around me.
I really understand what I feel. .73 .65
I have a good understanding of my own emotions. .69 .77
I have a good sense of why I have certain feelings most
.67 .74
of the time.
I always know whether I am happy or not. .45 .55
% of variance 23.75 16.62 15.09 14.20
Determinant =.003, Kaiser‑Meyer‑Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy = .793 Sigma = .000
Adaptive selling behaviour was measured via seven items from the adaptive selling
scale (ADAPTS), first developed by Spiro and Weitz [1990]. The items for ASB include
“I treat all customers pretty much the same”. This was measured on a 5‑point Likert scale
with the endpoint anchors being ‘Strongly Disagree’ and ‘Strongly Agree’. The measure
also proved to be adequately reliable by its coefficient alpha of .80. Table 3 presents fac‑
tor loadings for ASB items for the sample. The results are all substantial and statistically
significant. The scale reliability for ADAPTS has a coefficient alpha of .92.
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
Table 3. Standardised Factor Loadings for Latent Adaptive Selling Behaviour
Items
Factor Loadings Communalities
ASB7 – I change my approach from one customer to another. .77 .73
ASB5 – I treat all customers pretty much the same. –.74 .70
ASB6 – I like to experiment with different sales approaches. .70 .792
ASB1 – I am flexible in the selling approach I use. .67 .65
ASB4 – I do not use a set sales approach. .62 .74
ASB2 – I can easily use a wide variety of selling approaches. .61 .65
ASB3 – I vary my sales style from situation to situation. .61 .68
Determinant .003
Kaiser‑Meyer‑Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy .771
Sigma .000
We adopted both subjective and objective performance measures. The objective per‑
formance measure is defined as the percentage of accounts held over the annual target for
the previous three years. The item for objective performance was “What were your actual
sales compared to target sales during each of the last three years expressed as a percentage?
For example 10 % above write as 110 %; 20 % below write as 80 %”. Subjective performance
was measured by a self‑assessed general performance measure developed by Farh et al.
[1991]. Four items were included, such as “I make sales with the highest profit margin”.
The reliability of the scale has a coefficient alpha of .91.
Results
The first step in using SEM to test the model is to build the baseline measurement
model. When the measurement model was not appropriately fit, we revised the result by
assessing the parameter estimates and the modification indices [M.I] or standard residual.
As suggested by Byrne [2013], we then eliminated and/or re‑estimated the errors and/
or parameters accordingly. The baseline model consists of the following variables: the
independent variables [emotional intelligence, self‑emotion, others‑emotion, use of emo‑
tion and regulation of emotion]; the mediating variable [adaptive selling behaviour]; and
dependent variables of sales performance.
We first examined the measurement model by conducting CFA on 7 latent variables
and 28 indicators [comprised of 16 indicators for emotional intelligence, 7 indicators
for ASB, 4 indicators for subjective sales performance, and one for objective sales per‑
formance]. The Goodness Fit of Index indicated that the initial model did not fit the data
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
well. We found the primary reason for the first run not fitting was that the model solu‑
tion was not admissible. Specifically we spotted a high cross loading of objectives sales
performance on composite 2 [M.I. 75.150; Par Change .821], 3 [M.I. 77.459; Par Change
.911] and 4 [M.I. 69.972; Par Change .582] of subjective performance, pointing towards
a redundancy in the measures. Additionally the bivariate correlation between subjective
and objective performance was high [r = .713] indicating possibility of multicollinearity.
This redundancy however has been noted in previous studies [Viswesvaran et al., 1996].
Following the suggestion of Kline [2010] and Byrne [2013], in dealing with multicol‑
linearity, we combined the two constructs into one; that is we dropped objective sales
performance latent from the model but its observed indicator was parcelled into one and
loaded onto subjective sales performance.
We then retested the model and repeated the process until we found the model that
fitted to the Goodness Fit Index. In the process, we re‑estimated the following errors as
the modification index for these errors were found high; re‑estimated error EI8 (“I have
a good understanding of the emotions of people around me”) and error EI6 (“I am a good
observer of others emotion”), re‑estimated error EI12 (“I would always encourage myself
to try my best”) and error E19 (“I always set goals for myself and try my best to achieve
them”), and re‑estimated error EI16 (“I have a good control of my own emotions”) and
error EI14 (“I am quite capable of controlling my own emotions”).
A summary of the baseline measurement model is depicted in Table 4. Figure 2 shows
the final Measurement Model.
Table 4. Summary of CFA and Revisions Result for the Baseline Model

Model Changes Goodness of Fit Index
1 df = 1056; χ2/df = 3.124; GFI = .826;
χ2 = 3298.45;
Run 7 latent with 28 indicators
CFI = .901; RMSEA = 0.078; p‑Value = .000
2 Combined subjective and objective χ2 = 2831.45; df = 942; χ2/df = 3.124; GFI = .855;
performance, run 6 latent with 28 indicators CFI = .911; RMSEA = 0.071; p‑Value = .000
3 Re‑estimated error 8*6 and error 12*9, run 6 χ2 = 2432.46; df = 816; χ2/df = 2.980; GFI = .869;
latent with 26 indicators CFI = .912; RMSEA = 0.068; p‑Value = .000
4 Re‑estimated error 16*14, run 6 latent with χ2 = 2057.49; df = 746; χ2/df = 2.671; GFI = .915;
25 indicators CFI = .935; RMSEA = 0.055; p‑Value = .000
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
Table 5. Factor Correlation Matrix and Validity Table

AVE MSV EI 1 EI 2 EI 3 EI 4 ASB SP
EI 1 0.713 0.453 0.870
EI 2 0.623 0.397 0.454 0.894
EI 3 0.724 0.466 0.511 0.498 0.814
EI 4 0.520 0.211 0.482 0.477 0.521 0.748
ASB 0.611 0.292 0.314 0.242 0.258 0.277 0.718
SP 0.694 0.411 0.174 0.324 0.119 0.211 0.435 0.931
AVE – Average Variance Extracted, MSV – Maximum Shared Variance
Figure 2. Final Baseline Model

- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
Following the establishment of our baseline model, we then tested our hypotheses.
Table 6 presents the regression results.
Table 6. Regression Weights

Path Std [β] UnStd [β] S.E. C.R. [t‑value]
EI 1: Self‑emotion
.095 .103* .109 .934
→ Sales Performance
EI 2: Others‑emotion
.133* .153* .079 .957
EI 3: Use of emotion
.088 .083 .109 .934
EI 4: Regulation of emotion
.093 .091 .088 1.117
EI 1: Self‑emotion
.222** .321** .109 .934
→ ASB
EI 2: Others‑emotion
.298** .283** .079 1.251
→ ASB
EI 3: Use of emotion
.233** .262** .109 1.134
→ ASB
EI 4: Regulation of emotion
.219** .206* .068 1.117
→ ASB
Adaptive Selling Behaviour
.283** .229** .059 1.978
→ Performance
*p ≤ ..05, **p ≤ .01 Std – Standardized coefficient; UnStd – Unstandardized coefficient
S.E. – Standard Error; C.R. – Critical Ratio
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
Figure 3. Regression Result

Discussion
The emotional intelligence–sales performance relationship is relatively easy to inter‑
pret. Consistent with Hypothesis H1b, the second domain of EI [i.e., others‑emotions] has
a positive impact on sales performance. This finding aligns with several meta‑analyses such
as O’Boyle et al. [2011], Joseph and Newman [2010] and Van Rooy and Viswesran [2004].
Emotionally intelligent individuals who are able to recognize others’ emotions are adapt‑
able and flexible in handling change [Chrusciel, 2006; Goleman, 1998; Wang, Law, 2002].
They have the ability to monitor others’ feelings and emotions, discriminate among them,
and use this evaluation to guide their thinking and actions [Salovey, Mayer, 1997]. The
ability to recognize these emotions contributes to effective social interaction, an aptitude
that a successful salesperson arguably needs [Churchill et al., 1985]. Given the concept
of EI 2, in the case of emotionally intelligent salespeople, they have the ability to monitor
others’ feelings and needs and act accordingly to meet those needs. Arguably, these are
also some of the skills required to practise ASB [Borg, Johnston, 2013; Spiro, Weitz, 1990].
This phenomenon clarifies the rationale behind the current study’s findings.
Our hypotheses concerning other domains of EI [i.e., H1a, H1c and H1d] were not
supported. One possible explanation concerns how EI may predict job performance dif‑
ferently [Hough, 2003] and not always be in a linear relationship of cause and effect [Cote,
Miners, 2006]. Although when considered directly, three domains of EI are not related
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
to sales performance, the results of the current study show that these three domains link
to sales performance through ASB, demonstrating partial mediation in the absence of
direct effect. This indicates the importance of a synergistic combination of emotional
intelligence and adaptive skills, which in turn links emotional intelligence to sales perform‑
ance indirectly. The findings of our study add value to the emotional intelligence–sales
performance literature by providing insights on how the relationship actually occurs. Our
findings concur with Cote and Miners [2006], who implied that the impact of EI on job
performance is not always a linear effect.
Three interesting implications were made by the study in relation to ASB. First, the
findings of the current study support the contingency theory of ASB proposed by Weitz
et al. [1986], which claimed that ASB is an important determinant of a sales performance
among salespeople. The results of the current study have shown that ASB explains about
3 % of the variations in sales performance. This is conspicuous compared to the meta
analysis conducted by Churchill et al. [1985] which found that the average of variation
in sales performance associated with ASB is less than 4 %. These results serve not only to
add clarity to a number of previously unclear and contentious relationships but also to
extend the understanding of the overall ASB process.
Second, the findings have also shown that ASB serves as a mediator between EI and
sales performance. These findings are noteworthy and support the notion of few scholars
who argued that a salesperson’s traits such as empathy, self‑motivation and locus of control
are related to the practice of adaptive selling [Borg, Johnston, 2013; Spiro, Weitz, 1990].
This study employs the WLEIS scale to measure EI. Among other things, the scale assesses
the level of self‑motivation, understanding of the emotion of others, and the ability to
control one’s temper and emotions, indicating that if a person scores high in EI, s/he will
tend to be self‑motivated, have a good understanding of the emotions of others, including
customers, and be able to control his/her own emotions.
Third, it is also worth noting that the results of the current study support the claim
that adaptation during the sales presentation is an activity engaged in by most salespeople
in a context where the buying units and offerings are complex and each customer affords
a significant medium- to long‑term profit potential [Giacobbe et al., 2006; Kidwell et al.,
2007]. The mean rating for ASB in the present study is relatively high (3.53), indicat‑
ing that the respondents are highly adaptive with regard to the sales presentation. The
industry studied here is comprised of financial firms that deal with complex investment
products such as shares, debentures, unit trusts and bonds that arguably provide significant
medium- to long‑term profit potential.
On the methodological front, although it is not central to the research questions
addressed in this study, it is worth noting that we found the correlation between objective
and subjective performance was relatively high (r=.713) indicating possible multicollinear‑
ity [Byrne, 2013]. Indeed this was the case when we ran the Confirmatory Factor Analy‑
ses (CFA). The comparison of our results with those of Pransky et al. [2006] is interesting
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
and important. Pransky et al. [2006] suggest the objective and subjective performance are
distinct from one another; and that both tend to emphasise different aspect of perform‑
ance. However the findings of our current study lean toward the argument that objective
performance and subjective performance measure similar criteria, indicating they appear
to be one dimension [Viswesvaran et al., 1996].
Managerial Implications
In today’s highly competitive marketplace, personal selling plays a critical role in
ensuring the firm’s ability to understand customers’ needs, which in turn increases the
volume of profitable sales [Giacobe et al., 2006]. Several studies have found that sales‑
people play a key role in customer relationship management in terms of understanding,
communicating, and delivering value to customers; thus, today’s relationship marketing
focuses on interpersonal communication building and maintenance of relationships with
the customers as opposed to short‑term sales [Gummerson, 2008; Paparoidamis, Guenzi,
2009; Weitz, Bradford, 1999]. In today’s complex market, salespeople not only need to
have good interpersonal communication skills to communicate with both internal and
external customers, but also must be able to adapt, empathize and recognize others’ emo‑
tions. This study’s findings show that emotionally intelligent individuals are adaptable and
flexible in handling change and have the ability to monitor others’ feelings and emotions,
discriminate among them, and use this evaluation to guide their thinking and behaviour.
Arguably, these are some of the elements needed to effectively develop good interpersonal
communication skills with both internal and external customers. When salespeople and
customers are mutually committed to the relationship, they are motivated to maintain
the relationship’s existence in the long run and strive for mutual benefit [Paparoidamis,
Guenzi, 2009; Weitz, Bradford, 1999].
Additionally, we found a positive relationship between emotional intelligence and
adaptive selling behaviour; this has several managerial implications. First, when recruit‑
ing account managers, firms need to focus on potential candidates who (a) can facilitate
social interactions with target customers, (b) have a high level of emotional intelligence,
and (c) have the ability and skills to practise adaptive selling. Firms should also provide
training and motivation in order to impose and instill this aptitude in salespeople. This
has become especially important as traditional communication activities, such as TV and
radio advertising, have become very costly and competitive.
Several studies have established that the relational behaviour of salespeople, such as
adaptive selling, are the antecedents of relationship marketing, which in turn affects the
effectiveness of sales performance [Jones et al., 2003; Paparoidamis, Guenzi, 2009]. In this
study, we found that the aptitude of sales people, such as their ability to adapt their selling
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
technique, influences their sales performance. Consequently, firms need to recruit potential
salespeople who have the ability to recognize others’ emotion and to adapt when meeting
the needs of relationship marketing. Nonetheless, this is an area that future study could
develop further. It is hoped that this study will act as a catalyst to help further research
address this gap.
Limitation and Future Research

It is acknowledged that this study used only self‑reports for both EI and ASB. Self
‑reports can be subjected to various distortions, including elements of bias and/or the fak‑
ing of answers; however, previous studies have found that, when both peer and supervisor
ratings were gathered, results between the self and peer/supervisor ratings were similar
[Law et al., 2004; Goldenberg et al., 2006]. Moreover, supervisor ratings pose a valid‑
ity risk as indicators of true emotional intelligence. For example, some supervisors are
indiscriminately hard or easy across all participants or allow their personal opinions or
grievances to enter into their ratings [Strauss et al., 2001].
This research also provides opportunity for possible future studies. Further replication
is needed to determine how the findings reported herein align with the results of studies
conducted in other work environments. In particular, the impact of EI on sales perform‑
ance requires further study to understand the effect of EI constructs separately on sales
performance. Further research may also explore the potential of moderators (if any) on
the relationship between EI and sales performance.
References
Anglin, K.A., Stolman, J.J., Gentry, J.W. (1990), The Congruence of Manager Perception of Salesperson Perform‑
ance and Knowledge‑Based Measures of Adaptive Selling, The Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management,
10 (4), pp. 81–91.
Ashkansy, N.M., Daus, C.S. (2002), Emotion in the workplace: The new challenge for managers, Academy of
Management Executive, 16, pp. 76–86.
Austin, E.J. (2004), An investigation of the relationship between emotional intelligence and emotional task
performance, Personality and Individual Differences, 36, pp. 1855–1864.
Bardzil, P., Slaski, M. (200), Emotional intelligence: Fundamental competencies for enhanced service provision,
Managing Service Quality, 13(2), p. 97.
Boorom, M.L., Goolsby, J., Ramsey, R.P. (1998), Relational communication traits and their effect on adaptiveness
and sales performance, Academy of Marketing Science Journal, 26(1), pp. 16–30.
Borg, S.W., Johnston, W.J. (2013), The IPS‑EQ Model: Interpersonal Skills and Emotional Intelligence in a Sales
Process, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 33(1), pp. 39–51.
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
Brown, S.P., Cron, W., Slocum Jr, J.W. (1997), Effects of goal directed emotions on salesperson volitions, behaviour
and performance: A longitudinal study, Journal of Marketing, 61(1), pp. 39–50.
Brown, W.F., Moshavi, D. (2005), Transformational Leadership and Emotional Intelligence: A Potential Path‑
way for an Increased Understanding of Interpersonal Influence, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(7),
pp. 867–871.
Byrne, B. (2013), Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming,
Routledge.
Carmeli, A., Josman, Z.E. (2006), The relationship among emotional intelligence, task performance, and organi‑
zational citizen behaviors, Human Performance, 19(4), pp. 403–419.
Chrusciel, D. (2006), Considerations of emotional intelligence [EI] in dealing with change decision management,
Management Decision, 44(5), pp. 644–657.
Churchill, G.A., Ford, N.M., Hartley, S.W., Walker, O.C. (1985), The determinants of salesperson performance:
A meta‑analysis, Journal of Marketing Research, 22(2).
Cote, S., Miners, C.T.H. (2006), Emotional intelligence, cognitive intelligence and job performance, Administra-
tive Science Quarterly, 51, pp. 1–28.
Davies, M., Stankov, L., Roberts, R. (1998), Emotional intelligence: In search of an elusive construct, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 75(4), pp. 989–1015.
DelVecchio, S., Zemanek, J., McIntyre, R., Claxton, R. (2004), Updating the adaptive selling behaviour: Tactics
to keep and tactics to discard, Journal of Marketing Management, 20(4), pp. 859–875.
Dulewicz, C., Young, M., Dulewicz, V. (2005), The relevance of emotional intelligence for leadership perform‑
ance, Journal of General Management, 30(3), pp. 71–86.
Dwyer, J.H., Schurr, P.H., Oh, S. (1987), Developing buyer‑seller relationships, Journal of Marketing, 51(April),
pp. 11–27.
Feyerherm, A.E., Rice, CL. (2002), Emotional intelligence and team performance: The good, the bad and the
ugly, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 10(4), pp. 343–363.
Goldenberg, I., Matheson, K., Mantler, J. (2006), The assessment of emotional intelligence: A comparison of
performance‑based and self‑report methodologies, Journal of Personality Assessment, 86(1), p. 33.
Giacobbe, R.W., Jackson Jr., D.W.J., Crosby, L.A., Bridges, C.M. (2006), A contingency approach to adaptive sell‑
ing behaviour and sales performance: Selling situations and salesperson characteristics, The Journal of Personal
Selling & Sales Management, 26(2), pp.115-142.
Gibbs, N. (1995, October, 2), The EQ factor, Time, pp. 60–68.
Goleman, D. (1998), Working with emotional intelligence, New York, Bantam.
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., McKee, A. (2002), The new leaders, New York, Little Brown.
Gummesson, E. (2008), Customer centricity: reality or a wild goose chase? European Business Review, 20(4),
pp. 315–33.
Humprey, R.H., Pollack, J.M., Hawver, T.H. (2008), Leading with emotional labor, Journal of Managerial Psy-
chology, 23, pp. 151–168.
Jennings, S., Palmer, B.R. (2007), Enhancing sales performance through emotional intelligence development,
Organization & People, 14(2), pp. 55–61.
Johlke, M.C. (2006), Sales presentation skills and salesperson job performance, Journal of Business and Industrial
Marketing, 21(5), pp. 311–319.
Joseph, D.L., Newman, D.A. (2010), Emotional intelligence: An integrative meta‑analysis and cascading model,
Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, pp. 54–78.
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
Kidwell, B.R., McFarland, R., Avila, A. (2007), Perceiving Emotion in the Buyer–Seller Interchange: The Moder‑
ated Impact on Performance, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 27, 2 (Spring), pp. 119–132.
Kline, R.B. (2010), Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, Third Edition (Methodology in the
Social Sciences), New York, Guilford.
Law, K.S., Wong, C.S., Song, L.J. (2004), The construct and criterion validity of emotional intelligence and its
potential utility for management studies, Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, pp. 483–496.
Law, K.S., Wong, C.S., Huang, G.H., Li, X. (2008), The effects of emotional intelligence on job performance
and life satisfaction for the research and development scientist in China, Asia Pacific Journal Management, 25,
pp. 51–69.
Leech, N.L., Barret, K.C., Morgan, G.A. (2014), SPSS for introductory and intermediate statistics: Use and inter-
pretation, New York, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Longhorn, S. (2004), How emotional intelligence can improve management performance, International Journal
of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 16(4), pp. 220–230.
Matthews, G., Roberts, R.D., Zeidner, M. (2004), Seven myths about emotional intelligence, Psychological
Inquiry, 15(3), pp. 179–196.
Mayer, J.D., Caruso, D. (2002), The effective leader: Understanding and applying emotional intelligence, Ivy
Business Journal Online, pp. 1–5.
Mayer, J.D., Salovey, P. (1997), What is emotional intelligence? in P. Salovey, D. Sluyte (eds.), Emotional Develop-
ment and Emotional Intelligence: Educational Implications (pp. 3–31), New York, Basic Books.
Mayer, J.D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D.R. (2004), Emotional intelligence: Theory, findings, and implications, Psychol-
ogy Inquiry, 15(3), pp. 197–215.
Newsome, S., Day, A.L., Catano, V.M. (2000), Assessing the predictive validity of emotional intelligence, Per-
sonality and Individual Differences, 29(2), pp. 1005–1016.
O’Boyle Jr,E., Humprey, R., Pollack, J.F., Hawver, T.H., Story, P.A. (2011), The relation between emotional intel‑
ligence and job performance: A meta‑analysis, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 32, pp. 788–818.
Paparoidamis, N. G., Guenzi, P. (2009), An empirical investigation into the impact of relationship selling and LMX
on salespeople’s behaviour and sales effectiveness, European Journal of Marketing, 43(7/8), pp. 1053–1075.
Park, J.E., Holloway, B.B. (2003), Adaptive selling behaviour revisited: An empirical examination of learning
situation, sales performance, and job satisfaction, The Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 23(3),
pp. 239–253.
Pelham, A.M. (2009), An exploratory study of the influence of firm market orientation on salesperson adaptive
selling, customer orientation, interpersonal listening in personal selling and salesperson consulting behaviors,
Journal of Strategic Marketing, 17(1), pp. 21–29.
Pellitteri, J. (2002), The relationship between emotional intelligence and ego defence mechanisms, The Journal
of Psychology, 136(2), pp. 182–194.
Pransky, G., Finklestein, S., Berndt, E., Kyle, M., Mackell, J., Tortorice, D. (2006), Objective and self‑report
work performance measures: A comparative analysis, International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, 55(5), p. 390.
Rahim, M.A., Psenicka, C., Zhao, J.H., Yu, C.S., Chan, K.A., Kwok Wai, Y.S. et al. (2002), A model of emotional
intelligence and conflict management strategies: A study in seven countries, International Journal of Organiza-
tional Analysis, 10(4), p. 201.
Roche, M. (2004), Towards EI at a medium sized plastic manufacturing company, New Zealand Journal of Applied
Business Research, 3 (November), 41-50.
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access
Semadar, A., Robins, G., Ferris, G.R. (2006), Comparing the validity of multiple social effectiveness constructs
in the prediction of managerial performance, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 27, 443-461.
Sjoberb, L., Littorin, P. (2003), Emotional intelligence, personality and sales performance, Working Paper Series
of Business Administration, Stockholm School of Economies, (May).
Slaski, M., Cartwright, S. (2003), Emotional intelligence training and its implications for stress, health and
performance, Stress and Health, 1(4), pp. 233–239.
Spiro, R.L., Weitz, B.A. (1990), Adaptive selling: Conceptualisation, measurement and nomological validity,
Journal of Marketing Research, 27(1), pp. 61–69.
Sujan, H., Weitz, B., Kumar, N. (1994), Learning orientation, working smart, and effective selling. Journal of
Marketing, 58(3), pp. 39–52.
Tae, W.M., Won‑Moo, H. (2011), Emotional intelligence, emotional exhaustion and job performance, Social
Behavior and Personality, 39(8), pp. 1087–1096.
Van Rooy, D., Viswesvaran, C. (2004), Emotional intelligence: A meta‑analytic investigation of predictive validity
and nomological net, Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 65, pp. 71–95.
Viswesravan, C., Schmidt, F.L., Ones, D.S. (1996), Comparative analysis of the reliability of job performance
ratings, Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5), p. 557.
Weitz, B.A., Bradford, K.D. (1999), Personal selling and sales management: A relationship marketing perspec‑
tives, Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 27(Spring), pp. 241–254.
Weitz, B.A., Sujan, H., Sujan, M. (1986), Knowledge, motivation, and adaptive behaviour: A framework for
improving selling effectiveness, Journal of Marketing, 50, pp. 174–191.
Wong, C.S., Law, KS. (2002), The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence of performance and
attitude: An exploratory study, The Leadership Quarterly, 13, pp. 243–274.
- 10.1515/ijme-2015-0002
via free access

Emotional Intelligence - Sales Performance Relatio

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Emotional Intelligence - Sales Performance Relatio

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

32 Zazli Lily Wisker, Athanasios Poulis

International Journal of Management and Economics (Zeszyty Naukowe KGŚ)

Zazli Lily Wisker